If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Did ya miss those little words from my post in there, Roger? Or just ignoring them?

The whole point of your OP is a predicated run against PBO by Bachmann, NOT BUSH ! I'm merely responding to your hypothesis.

This Admin's Justice Dept. attorneys, NOT BUSH'S !, are the ones that,in 2010 argued in court for warrantless cell phone tracking, to read your e-mails without warrants, and stick a GPS unit on your car to track you without your knowledge and without a warrant.This Admin's work, NOT BUSH'S !, is the one that helped get the intrusion between doctor and patient in the PPACA by requiring electronic reporting.

PBO's Admin is the one pushing for raising the debt ceiling to over 14 trillion dollars this year, 2011, NOT BUSH'S !

If you can't face the hoax in "change", that's fine.
But if you can't even discuss the potential issues between 2 hypothetical future candidates, because you're so stuck in the past of "I hate Bush" land, that's pretty sad.

WASHINGTON, DC – Government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn’t violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn’t tracking your movements.
That is the bizarre — and scary — rule that now applies in California and eight other Western states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers this vast jurisdiction, recently decided the government can monitor you in this way virtually anytime it wants — with no need for a search warrant. (See a TIME photoessay on Cannabis Culture.)
It is a dangerous decision — one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell. It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich.This case began in 2007, when Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents decided to monitor Juan Pineda-Moreno, an Oregon resident who they suspected was growing marijuana. They snuck onto his property in the middle of the night and found his Jeep in his driveway, a few feet from his trailer home. Then they attached a GPS tracking device to the vehicle’s underside.
After Pineda-Moreno challenged the DEA’s actions, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit ruled in January that it was all perfectly legal. More disturbingly, a larger group of judges on the circuit, who were subsequently asked to reconsider the ruling, decided this month to let it stand. (Pineda-Moreno has pleaded guilty conditionally to conspiracy to manufacture marijuana and manufacturing marijuana while appealing the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained with the help of GPS.)

In these highly partisan times, GPS monitoring is a subject that has both conservatives and liberals worried. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit's pro-privacy ruling was unanimous — decided by judges appointed by Presidents Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

"It's not that government is inherently stupid, although that's a debatable question."
Rand Paul CPAC speech 2011

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791
________________________________________
Proud partner of (HR) WR SR Brian's 44Magnum Monster
co-owned by HR Rianne's 2nd Chance Hurricane Rebel

The central question that resulted in Jones' successful appeal, which is being closely watched by civil liberties groups, is whether the government needs a warrant to use GPS technology to tail a suspect.

Jones' lawyer on appeal, Steve Leckar, argued that his client's right to a reasonable expectation of privacy was violated when federal agents attached a GPS device to his vehicle without getting a warrant. Jones was sentenced to life in prison.

"It's not that government is inherently stupid, although that's a debatable question."
Rand Paul CPAC speech 2011

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791
________________________________________
Proud partner of (HR) WR SR Brian's 44Magnum Monster
co-owned by HR Rianne's 2nd Chance Hurricane Rebel

What I don't understand if the 9th circuit court district already said it was legal to use a gps planted divice wouldn't it then have to go to a higher court? These are 2 different cases involving 2 different people and one has already been ruled on.

What I don't understand if the 9th circuit court district already said it was legal to use a gps planted divice wouldn't it then have to go to a higher court? These are 2 different cases involving 2 different people and one has already been ruled on.

There's really only 1 thing you need to understand here, Roger - BOTH of these cases were argued before the Circuit Courts by Obama Justice Dept lawyers.
The Obama JD has until Feb. 17 to take the Jones case to the SCOTUS.

If Obama, through Holder, et al didn't believe this was an appropriate procedure, to track you via GPS without a warrant, they could have just dropped the case on lack of merit, similar to the New Black Panther Party case. But they want to be able to track you without a warrant, which is the point I was making in my post comparing issues.

Last edited by BrianW; 01-24-2011 at 09:02 AM.

"It's not that government is inherently stupid, although that's a debatable question."
Rand Paul CPAC speech 2011

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791
________________________________________
Proud partner of (HR) WR SR Brian's 44Magnum Monster
co-owned by HR Rianne's 2nd Chance Hurricane Rebel

Back to the original topic, after her Tea Party response last night was there any doubt that Bachmann has Presidential aspirations...her response was just campaign rhetoric from last Nov. she offered nothing new or fresh and the camera that was on her was unflattering because her eyes were fixated on the teleprompter. I never felt like she was talking directly to the viewer, more like we were an observer in the room

All my Exes live in Texas

Originally Posted by lanse brown

A few things that I learned still ring true. "Lanse when you get a gift, say thank you and walk away. When you get a screwing walk away. You are going to get a lot more screwings than gifts"

Back to the original topic, after her Tea Party response last night was there any doubt that Bachmann has Presidential aspirations...her response was just campaign rhetoric from last Nov. she offered nothing new or fresh and the camera that was on her was unflattering because her eyes were fixated on the teleprompter. I never felt like she was talking directly to the viewer, more like we were an observer in the room

That was distracting and hard to watch. It was taped, I think, so you would think they could have fixed it.

I thought the republican response had nothing new either. Same old bash the democrats, and offer nothing instead. He delivered his speech very well however, but spoke in a few code words. How about "if you're near retirement age, you won't be affected"? What does that mean?

I won't call her names, but I could NOT sit through bachmann's recitation.